Archive for the ‘Chapter 26’ Category

What was a diphtheria outbreak like?

Read this:

Snow Day adjustments as of January 24

YOUR CHAPTERS 24-26 Test will be Monday, January 27.
Chapter 27 will be due Tuesday, January 28.

Documents/Blog posts especially emphasized will include Turner, Booker T Washington, WEB DuBois, and the Industrialization and Urbanization links.

Here are some study questions:
1. When was William Jennings Bryan a presidential candidate, and list the parties he represented?
2. What were the causes of the Great Railroad Strike of 1877? of the Pullman Strike of 1894? How did each strike end?
3. What is a “cow town?” Where were they, specifically? How were the railroads associated with them?
4. How did the invention of barbed wire end the days of the open range and the long drive? (know what all these terms meant, and where the major cattle trails were)
5. What was the “Billion Dollar Congress,” and why was it called that? Why did it pass the Pension Act of 1890?
6. What exactly, is the difference between a “boomer” and a “sooner?”
7. What were the major challenges to morality and society during this period? What were “Comstock Laws?”
8. What were the major leaders and groups of the Prohibition and Temperance movements? What is the difference between Prohibition and Temperance?
9. Explain the main beliefs (and overlapping beliefs) of the Greenback Labor Party, the Populists, (and the Progressives).
10. What were the specific reasons why farmers were distressed in this period, and what actions did they take to try to advocate for themselves?
11. What were the goals and specific provisions of the Dawes Act? What were the flaws of this legislation?
12. What does “accomodationsim” mean?
13. How were the “New Immigrants” different from previous waves of immigrants in US history?
14. How did the increasing disparity of wealth distribution affect the US? What theories were created to attempt to address the problem of this disparity?
15. Where were the main mining discoveries of this time period, and what impact did they have on national wealth and settlement patterns?

Questions over the Turner Thesis

For those of you who did not pick up the printed packets, you are going to want to get started on the questions, so here is a .pdf of the packet. You need to get started on these questions as soon as possible to determine ones you need to ask me about on Tuesday.

Click here to download the .pdf: Turner Essay with questions

Chapter 26 questions- due Tuesday

The Great West and the Agricultural Revolution

1. Why does the author refer to America as an “acquisitive nation” on page 634? What does this mean in comparison with the culture of Native peoples? What specifically were the specific provocations by whites that often precipitated Indian warfare?
2. Look at the litany of Native displacement that is described beginning in the left hand column on p. 634 through the first half of the right column of text. Think back to our discussions last semester. What caused that wave of migration and warfare?
3. What were basic terms of the treaties between Native nations and the US government in the post-Civil War era?Describe the main characteristics of the reservation system. What benefits did it have for the United States? What facets of Native culture made true negotiation with them difficult? What effect did this have on the legitimacy of treaties?
4. What was a “Buffalo Soldier,” besides being a great song by Bob Marley?

5. Describe the Sand Creek massacre. How fair were the battles between indigenous warriors and the US Army in terms of weaponry, etc.? How did Helen Hunt Jackson and other reformers describe the treatment of the Indians?
6. What did Custer do to upset the peace after the Treaty of Ft. Laramie? What eventually happened to him?
7. How did Lt. William Fetterman indirectly lead to the establishment of the Sioux reservation—and the Battle of Little Big Horn?
8. What was unusual about the Battle of Little Big Horn? Why did the Nez Perce rebel, and what happened to them?
9. How did railroads affect Native American fortunes? How did they affect farmers (see p. 656)?
10. What methods were used to force Indians to assimilate? What about the buffalo?
11. What caused the “Battle” of Wounded Knee? Why is this battle considered to be significant?
12. What were the main features of the Dawes Severalty Act? What were its consequences?
13. What does “Kill the Indian and save the man” mean, and where did that saying come from? How did alleged “friends of the Indian” attempt to “help” the Indians?
14. What was the Comstock Lode? Where was it? What was the significance of the mining frontier in settling whites in the West (and upsetting the Indians)?
15. Women who were able to vote before 1900 were most likely to live where, and why?
16. How did the railroads influence the cattle industry? Describe the Long Drives and their routes. What were the main “cow towns?”
17. What developments forced the development of cattle raising as a big business?
18. What were the provisions of the Homestead Act? What were the advantages and the weaknesses of the Act?
19. What was the difference between the lands to the east of the 100th meridian and those west of it? Wallace Stegner wrote a book entitled “Beyond the Hundredth Meridian: John Wesley Powell and the Second Opening of the West.” What do you think this book is about? What does a hydraulic engineer do (see p. 648)?
20. Who were the sooners, the eighty-niners, and the boomers?
21. Why did farmers convert to cash crops? What effects did this have? How was agriculture mechanized?
22. What pressures did farmers face? What were the Grange and the Farmers’ Alliance? Who did farmers blame for their troubles, and how accurate was that? What happened to prices for farm goods, and why?
23. What were the main beliefs of the Populists? Who was William Jennings Bryan, and what was his point in his “Cross of Gold” speech?
24. Who were “Coxey’s Army?” What happened to them?
25. What did the US government do during the Pullman strike? What does “government by injunction” mean?
26. What was the main beef between “gold bugs” and “silverites?” What did the Gold standard Act do?
27. Summarize some of the main criticisms of Jackson’s frontier thesis.
28. Who were the main Indian leaders mentioned in your book? Match them with their tribe, and the basic area in which they operated (for instance: Chief Joseph, Nez Perce, Nez Perce, Oregon, surrendered to Oliver O Howard, 1877)

Frederick Jackson Turner’s Essay- “The Significance of the Frontier in American History”

Frederick Jackson Turner,  “The Significance of the Frontier in American History” (1893)

































This is a wrong perspective. The pioneer needed the goods of the coast, and so the grand series of internal improvement and railroad legislation began, with potent nationalizing effects. Over internal improvements occurred great debates, in which grave constitutional questions were discussed. Sectional groupings appear in the votes, profoundly significant for the historian. Loose construction increased as the nation marched westward. But the West was not content with bringing the farm to the factory. Under the lead of Clay  “Harry of the West”  protective tariffs were passed, with the cry of bringing the factory to the farm. The disposition of the public lands was a third important subject of national legislation influenced by the frontier.












US Indian Policy from the Dawes Act to the New Deal

This is the introduction to a paper I wrote in graduate school. It sums up the effects of the Dawes Act rather succinctly.

At the turn of the 20th century, the United States government had decided upon the policy of allotment as a solution to the “Indian problem.” Allotment had become the law of the land with the passage of the Dawes General Allotment Act in 1887 and the Curtis Act, which covered Indian Territory, in 1898. These Acts allowed the President to have reservations surveyed and apportioned into individual allotments suitable for a small farmer. Individual Indians received parcels of roughly one quarter section (160 acres) each or less, depending upon the size of the reservation and the age and marital status of the Indian. Most Indians received much less than 80 acres. Two outcomes were desired. First, it was held that humanitarian impulses (as well as notions of cultural superiority) dictated assistance to our “backward brethren.” But far more importantly, Indians who were converted to farming and ranching would not need as much land to support their families as did hunters; thus, these Indians could be persuaded to sell their “excess” holdings to the government for white settlement. Allotted Indians would be subject to taxes and all the other burdens of citizenship.

The allotment policy also included programs to extinguish original Indian cultures, including languages and religion. Schools enforced the use of English only and emphasized vocational skills needed by a farmer or housewife. The policy of allotment and its educational programs ignored one insuperable flaw: many Indians did not want to farm. The cultivation of plants was not considered an honorable occupation for men in many Indian societies, especially in the northern and central Great Plains. Other native religions forbade cutting into the Earth with a sharp instrument such as a plow. Policymakers either ignored or were unaware of these obstacles. It was believed that so long as Indians held the land in common, there would be no individual incentive to bring it fully into production.

Much of the appeal of assimilation was also financial in nature. Some congressmen, particularly from Western areas, were critical of the amount of money spent on Indian affairs. They believed that by force of arms whites had taken over the continent and that therefore, nothing was owed the Indians. They decried the endless financial obligations that were required so long as Indians maintained their tribal status. They sought to abolish the Indian Bureau and terminate the federal recognition of tribes. Once tribes passed away, Indians would have no special privileges granted to them. These westerners were also frustrated that Indian land was protected from white economic exploitation. Assimilated Indians would have no federal protections to keep their lands forever beyond the reach of development. All lands would be in the public domain or be private property, and use would be unrestricted. The result would be economic growth for the nation.

To protect the Indians, the Dawes Act provided that the title to each allotment would be held in trust by the government for a period of 25 years. During this time of adjustment, the Federal government — specifically, the secretary of the interior and the bureaucrats in the Bureau of Indian Affairs –- would serve as trustee to each Indian and control all individual financial affairs. At the end of the twenty-five year period, an Indian could petition for a patent in fee simple, which would transfer title from trust status through the Federal government to the individual. At that time, the Indian had to prove competence to handle his or her property. If competent, the Indian would own the land outright, and would be subject to taxation by the state and local governments. Once an Indian received his land in fee simple, free from government control, he would be granted United States citizenship. The acceptance of an allotment implied a willingness to sever tribal ties. The concept of dual citizenship in both tribe and greater nation was not entertained. An assimilated Indian would no longer need the protection of the tribe when he or she had the protections of American culture, education, and citizenship. Once tribes no longer existed, treaty obligations would die as well. In 1905, the Supreme Court ruled that Indians who accepted citizenship could not receive federal Indian services, although this decision was overturned eleven years later.

Allotment perfected the drive to dispossess the Indians that had begun with the first treaties. The Burke Act of 1906 allowed the secretary of the interior to allow some Indians to petition for their patents before the twenty-five year period had elapsed. Some agents colluded with white neighbors to pressure Indians into receiving their patent and immediately selling their allotment, often for a fraction of its value. Further, the government operated a “competency commission” from 1915 to 1920 which forced twenty thousand Indians of less than half “Indian blood” to accept their patents without consent. When they could not pay the state taxes on the land, they were forced to sell. An estimate by the National Resources Board in 1935 revealed that about 50% of all allotments had been released from government oversight from 1900 to 1934. Most of these allotments had been alienated from Indian ownership due to the inability to pay the taxes assessed by the states and local communities. Therefore, the mixed blood Indians, who were often more acculturated than their full-blooded brethren, were more apt to lose their allotments. Full bloods actually were more likely to retain their land during the allotment period, since they were granted a longer period of government protection.

Those who managed to retain their lands were usually unable to successfully farm them. The climate of most reservations was too arid for such small plots of land to be profitable. Much of the land that remained in Indian hands by the 1930s was submarginal in quality. Population pressures further eroded the usefulness of allotments. In 1900, the Indian population of the US was numbered at 237,196. By 1930, the Indian population had increased to 343,352. This meant that there were far fewer allotments than there were Indians, a development that had not been anticipated by the framers of the Dawes Act. As the original allottees died, the laws of inheritance exacerbated this problem. Allotments became fractionated into useless parcels as their estates were divided among heirs. With the lower life expectancy of Indians, a single piece of land could pass through several estates within a few decades. Because most Indians had no wills, each successive inheritance was usually divided among several heirs. Some Indians had inherited plots only a few feet square. In areas in which Indian reservations were comprised of submarginal land, only large tracts could be utilized successfully; therefore, these allotments became even less valuable each time they changed hands. A 1934-35 survey of inherited lands that had originally been allotments found just 7 percent being used by Indians, with the remainder being sold to whites or left unused. Furthermore, allotted land benefited only one-half of reservation Indians through rent or ownership: 49 percent of Indians on allotted reservations in 1933 were landless.

Many Indians and non-Indians alike decried the conditions prevalent on reservations and boarding schools. Even before the Depression struck the United States unemployment and poverty were rules rather than exceptions. Reservations were isolated from business centers and employment opportunities. The Indian Bureau also failed to provide vocational training, expertise to help Indians create their own businesses, or plans to draw employers to the reservation. Fifty-five percent of reservation Indians in 1928 had a per capita income of less than two hundred dollars annually; the top two percent of reservation inhabitants had yearly incomes above five hundred dollars, and wages generally made up no more than two hundred dollars per annum. Schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs often did not have enough room for all the children living on a reservation, and many of the buildings were in poor repair. The lack of health care was evident in the astronomical rates of infection of tuberculosis and trachoma, an eye disease that could result in blindness. Benjamin Reifel, a Sioux who served as Commissioner of Indian Affairs under Gerald Ford, remembered, “While I was a boy growing up on the Rosebud Indian Reservation we had the most sickening poverty that one could imagine. Tuberculosis was a killer of Indians. The people on the Pine Ridge Reservation and at Oglala were eating their horses to survive. Impoverishment was everywhere.”

Children in boarding schools faced the same conditions due to chronic underfunding of educational programs by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Congress. As historian Floyd O’Neil has stated,

The word assimilation was not an abstract, remote concept. Rather, it was an active philosophy, with tremendous power to break up families and even to take the lives of children. For the death rate of Indian children was much higher than that of the general population.
Indian children were not welcomed in public schools, since their parents paid no taxes and lived on land outside state jurisdiction, not to mention the barrier of racism that discouraged enrollment.

How did assimilation last so long as official policy? Assimilation had been supported by many of the reformers of Indian affairs prior to the 1930s. The Indian Rights Association had been particularly influential during the 1920s and was the oldest Indian reform group then active. Founded in 1882, its stated mission was to promote Christianity and the private ownership of property for Indians. The IRA supported government policies which sup-pressed native religions. Ironically, other reformers argued that the IRA actively campaigned against Indian rights, since it sought to deny Indians their constitutional right to freedom of worship.

Because Indians had not begun to organize themselves until the 1940s, the debate on Indian policy took place with little Indian input. The reforming spirit that would overtake American social policy in the early decades of the twentieth century impacted Indian affairs as well. By the 1930s several organizations were active in the debate over federal Indian policy. Among these were the American Indian Defense Association, the Indian Rights Association, the National Council of American Indians, the National Association of Indian Affairs, and the General Federation of Women’s Clubs’ Indian Welfare Committee. Several members of these groups would receive federal appointments during the 1930s and 1940s and attempt to put their reform ideas into action. The result would be an attempt to reverse the course of federal Indian affairs.


The next part of this story can be found here and will be published in February:

Was the Homestead Act a success?

Before the passage of the Homestead Act, the Great Plains had often been referred to by geographers as “The Great American Desert” due to its common pattern of drought and generally arid conditions. However, once the Homestead Act was passed, the area along the 1ooth Meridian was often advertised, especially by the railroads and their land agents, as a veritable paradise. In reality, this was a place of long droughts and sudden downpours, although the snowstorm and thunderstorms never managed to counterbalance the drought.

What were the problems with the Homestead Act? Was 160 acres enough land to support a family in the “desert” of the Great Plains? That number had been chosen because it was more than adequate for the support of a family in the Ohio Valley. But the Great Plains had entirely different soil, topography, and climate, with very little surface water available, fewer trees, and limited technology at the time to do anything about it.

First, go here:

Of course, some scientists tried to warn about the ecological disaster that could ensue. One of these was John Wesley Powell, a fascinating character in his own right who explored much of the Desert Southwest, including the Colorado River, even though he only had one arm. Powell warned that large settlements dependent upon agriculture would not really be possible west of the 100th Meridian— the western boundary of Oklahoma and Texas.


Unfortunately, more people believed a discredited theory of climatology that “the rain follows the plow.” The general idea was that, once the plows of the settlers turned over the original sod, moisture would be released into the air, priming the water cycle and increasing rainfall. I know– crazy! However, just by chance, the 1870s and 1880s were unusually wet, and so many people, including some who called themselves scientists, considered this fluke of weather to be proof of man-made climate change.

Read this:

Of course, eventually, encouraging thousands of small farms on the Great Plains would have devastating ecological consequences: The Dust Bowl of the 1930s: